McCain hearts Airbus

Over Boeing....The Question is WHY?!

Issue is a replacement for the KC-135. Probably, every aspect considered, the most critical aircraft in our air force fleet.

But since Sen McCain certainly should know, better than anyone else in the Senate, ALL aspects relating..... Why is he adamant for the 330?

There's LOTS of reasons NOT to buy Airbus.. Not the least of which is EADSgovernments have effectively subsidized the 330 to the detriment of Boeing.

A330 MRTT {KC-45}

KC-767A {Yeah, that's a change in DoD designator rules}

 

Because if you're flying them, it's easier to walk away from a crash? :banana: :lol: :twisted:

 

Hey PF It's French that's why NOT Euro, it maybe made all over Europe but please dont associate me/us with anything French thank you.

 

Uh.. sorry. That horse is long gone the barn. Comes to aviation, Like a lot of other EU issues, you are ALL French. Or 'Snookered again' could work, I suppose. Take your pick.

Anyway... here's the foof on the Airbus wiki

So the issue indeed has two sides. The subsidy issue looks like a Mexican standoff, unless you pick nits for fun.

So how about we just go straight for 'mission suitability'?
Check the dimensions and payloads. Bigger is not better. And support components, while providing jobs SOMEWHERE, is also an issue.

- -----------------------------
Also: If this looks familiar, it should:



Airbus has been working on it for over 25 years, to replace what took Lockheed 7 years, table napkin sketch to delivery.

--------------------------------
Lest you get the wrong idea, I'm all FOR Airbus' competition with Boeing.

The west SHOULD have at least two MAJOR aircraft builders. And that's what they've got now.
But it would sure be a lot better if Governments played as small a part as possible.

 

RE: Re: McCain hearts Airbus

Well you wont mind me calling you MEXICAN Then PF will you???

 

Just don't call him a Canadian.

 

Is that worse then?

 

Re: RE: Re: McCain hearts Airbus

Depends... my tax money goes south. NAFTA brings em in. If I buy certain Ford or GM, I'm buying NAFTA and NAFTA is in effect 'subsidized'

What I dont get is how you parse 'Euro'. I consider GB to be distinct. If I say Continental Europe v GB you'd understand that. I make the distinction implicitly.. for now.
And France thinks they {and their Belgian lackeys} RUN EU. I get that.. always have.

My point was BAE and Hawker-Siddeley are now part of the consortium.
-----------------------------------------------------

Not to me. I love Canucks... they fun, eh!

As opposed to Mimes.. but there we go again.

 

RE: Re: RE: Re: McCain hearts Airbus

And my Point is PF That Europe is excactly that EUROPE. The UK is an Island other than the frigging Tunnel NOT Connected by land to Europe, hence an island. we dont have EURO's THANKFULLY and so are not run by EUROPEANS.(French or German) So Jose I am NOT European BUT British. Sava

 

Okay.. I changed it to EADS. By which I also mean its predecessors and those companies' governments.
Which for now leaves BAE, etc.. out of it.

But I still have no idea why that sent you into a snit. I never called you French, I never implied UK was 'Europe'... and I explain that in the NAFTA reference.

 

I thought you said you never called me French?

Uh.. sorry. That horse is long gone the barn. Comes to aviation, Like a lot of other EU issues, you are ALL French. Or 'Snookered again' could work, I suppose. Take your pick.

 

RE: Re: McCain hearts Airbus

Someone should tell those Boeing workers that they live in Chicago

And Martin, those French planes have English aircraft engines - just sayin'

 

Re: RE: Re: McCain hearts Airbus

Yeah I know, some Airbus have British Wings too, but they are excatly that FRENCH Planes.